I would think that after all these trades, perhaps you would listen to the feedback you get on every single one of them.

How about this as a general rule: have a 3:1 asset ratio maximum in all your trades. If it’s ever 8 for 2, you’re doing it wrong. If it’s like 7 for 1 like normal, you’re doing it really wrong.

1. The Toews conspiracy theory is completely untrue, the article quoted "April Foolington" as a source

2. If you are sending 8 assets for 2, the trade is never going to go through. The Bruins do not have the trade capital necessary to get Kane, unless you are willing to part with McAvoy or Pastrnak (which you obviously aren't, so it is not going to happen)

Just trade the rest of the team while you’re at it

100% agree. Getting Kane would take a premier future the likes of which don’t often get traded.

Both correct! Bruins will not give up nearly that many assets and Hawks probably wouldnt do it for much less.

@minionhypers u got the retention right which is good though! bruins wouldnt even consider it unless they knew their cap wasnt gonna be a total mess in 2 years.

And yeah if the bruins were to throw in Pasta or McAvoy it would be 50% retention and at least a 1st rounder coming back to the bruins so its not worth it to either team